Date: April 11th, 2006 10:42 PMAuthor: redacreSubject: Houston law students try to force dean out b/c of rankings

About 100 law students showed up at faculty meeting to confront the dean over Houston's steady decline in the rankings. Reportedly, the dean broke into tears. There seems to be a serious movement to persuade the dean to resign.

I think the group is more concerned about the few sub-par admits that bring down the average scores. Last year the school gave a full scholarship to someone with a 152/3.2. From what I can gather, the dean and others are big on AA and not so big on rankings.

just for the record, even if she had subpar stats for the school, i know for a fact she's currently near the very top of her class. so in that case, you can't really complain about her being "sub-par."

Yep. You have dumb students, ignorant students, stupid students, poor students, redneck students, assholes students, students not admitted to any Tier 1 schools, students with 140s LSATs, students with 150s LSATs, students with 8 fingers.

Believe it or not idiot, American URM's generally make up around 10% or less of the student body overall, so if you had basic math skills you would recognize that it wouldn't impact the 25th and 75th percentile scores, which is what is taken into account by U.S. News and World Report. Also, a large portion of that 10% would have been accepted without AA anyway. FYI - 9% of the student body at the University of Houston is African-American, Mexican-American, or Native American.

Date: April 11th, 2006 10:59 PMAuthor: redacreSubject: part of an e-mail going around:

Concerned Fellow UHLC Students:

Many of you were present for last Friday's Law Center faculty meeting - thank you to the 100+ that attended to show student concern for the state of affairs at our school. Those of you that were not present have surely heard all the details by now. A quick summary is in order.

The UHLC continued its sinking in the U.S. News & World Report law school rankings this year, but with a precipitous drop that has us tied for 70th place. What was previously our creep toward the third tier suddenly appears more like the Titanic on its way to the bottom. Naturally, faculty and students alike are concerned; let us not forget the thousands of alumni whose degrees are also depreciating as they hang on office walls around town and across the country.

When the dean eventually rolled around to the rankings (and to a lesser degree, the abominable Fall Semester class schedule that makes all students evening students), she again held the floor, to "spin" the agenda before hearing from students. We heard Dean Rapoport’s annual rhetoric about why the rankings don't work, why they don't reflect the quality of our school or education, and why she refuses to play the game that every other law school dean in the country plays in achieving respectable rankings. While it is true that the classes and education we receive each day may be no different or worse than they were last year, it is undeniable that the UHLC J.D. has steadily become worth less. It seems our dean cannot see this, in spite of its obviousness to those of us rapidly spending ourselves into debt on an equally-rapidly declining investment.

The reception of student remarks by Dean Rapoport was a tragedy that had to be witnessed to be appreciated. The dean ignored the students. The dean blamed the students. The dean blamed the faculty, even calling out one or two professors by name. The dean cried. . . After all, Dean Rapoport damages not just the law school - Newton teaches us that her own value as a dean anywhere will hit rock bottom at precisely the same moment our rankings reach impact. She has a deeply personal, vested interest in this debacle. While she may not be ready to leave her post, it seems only logical that she is likewise not ready to join the ranks of the academically unemployable. Better that she be given the opportunity to do the right thing, with dignity, on her own. We first need to create that environment, option, and incentive for the dean.

If such a genuine attempt proves unsuccessful, and Dean Rapoport entrenches herself and clings to her tenuous hold, then we need a contingent of faculty with the courage to stand up and say "enough is enough – we must save this school." I can personally guarantee a student turnout of over 500 at a faculty meeting where that happens - just schedule it for Krost Hall ahead of time. Once our alumni, students, and faculty have approached the dean about leaving on her own two feet, it will be much easier to paint a picture for the University administration. If we are forced down this uglier path, then we must make the right moves in the right way, making sure that the writing on the wall is crystal clear. What is clear? The right time is NOW.

I will distribute this message to every student I know how to reach via the law school mailing lists. I ask you in turn to distribute it to professors with whom you have close relationships. More importantly, please pass it along to all the alumni of the law school that you can reach. Help inform those who do not realize the magnitude and seriousness of what is happening at the law school - those that don't even know their law degrees are depreciating into oblivion. I assure you that they are invested in this disaster, that they need to know about it, and that at least some of them will become productively involved in helping us save this ship before the last deck slips below the water.

Best regards,

Deeply Troubled UHLC Student

OTHER IMPORTANT NOTES:

Be aware that Prof. Guerra-Thompson is moderating a meeting to discuss student views on rankings tomorrow at noon, 109BLB. Bring your own lunch.

Feel free to respond to this e-mail address, where messages will be stored and archived in case they are later needed. At some point I will investigate whether this can be set up as a Yahoo Group mailing list or internet forum for mass distribution, to help interest parties remain involved in what is sure to be an interesting and hopefully fruitful process.

they were 70th this year, 65th one year ago and 59th the year before that. they really cant expect to ever have a good national reputation which is 40% of the rankings but who cares? 91% of grads stay in state, it's silly to think they will ever have a national rep.

Well said. Of course Houston will never be a nattional school. However, when I went to law school in Texas, it was a solid regional school. I think that most Houston students would be happy with a 50 ranking. I think the big fear the current students have is that their school will continue its downward trend out of the top 100 and into Tier 3 land with Texas Tech. Although the current students will have graduated if and when this occurs, the value of their degree will be depreciated.

Yeah, when I was contingency-planning half a year ago in case I fucked up the LSAT, SMU/Houston/Baylor seemed to have roughly identical reputations from what I could gather. Now Houston is clearly worse. A tiny decline could have it straddling the third tier.

Did the Dean really cry at the meeting? I have a hard time believing it. And do Houston students really think this is a big deal? You dropped five spots? You act like you went from 8th to 13th or something.

This would be a good spot to post the pic of the retarded PCL students mixing plaster on the stairs(or whatever they were doing). Too bad I can't find it. Assuming I found the pic, my post would have read:

The building just needs a bit of patching up and UH will rocket back into the first tier.

the drop has been steep and fast; if you went to, say, University of Texas five ago and in that time it dropped twenty ranks to 36, you might have reason for concern; if Houston goes TTT, most alumnus will be concerned

a move from 50s to 70 is not anywhere near as big as from 15 to 30s. a lot of those T2 schools are interchangeable and considering the consolidation that USNEWS did this year (putting many schools into 1 ranking) a 5 point drop is virtually meaningless for houston.

More concerned with returning "our talents to the community" than with rankings:

Nancy Rapoport

Nancy Rapoport ’82, dean of the University of Houston Law Center, has accomplished much in her relatively short career.

Rapoport graduated from Rice summa cum laude with a double major in legal studies and honors psychology. In 1985 she completed her doctorate of jurisprudence at Stanford, where she was a member of the Law Review and vice president of alumni programs, while also finding time to win the women’s intramural power-lifting competition.

From there Rapoport clerked for the renowned Joseph T. Sneed III of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and then worked at the San Francisco firm Morrison & Foerster, where she specialized in bankruptcy law, the field in which she has established her national reputation.

In 1991, she returned to academia, when she became an associate professor at the Ohio State College of Law. Within three years she was a full professor with tenure. Rapoport was then named dean and professor of law at the University of Nebraska College of Law. In 2000 she returned to Houston to head up the UH Law Center.

Rapoport’s remarks upon her return to Houston give insight to what motivates her to accomplish so much: “Because our tuition is low, relative to that of private schools, we can educate those for whom a legal education — and the power that it brings — would not otherwise be possible. As a public law school, we have a moral obligation to return our talents to the community.”

Honestly, people go to UH for the CHEAP tuition – YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR.

Spending per student counts a lot in the rankings. The private schools like SMU and Baylor charge more, but they also spend more on their students’ educations. UT has its own law school endowment and is more adept at working the Texas Legislature (see below for an example from the last Appropriations Bill). However, even UT has a tough time with the Legislature these days.

US News uses medians for LSAT and GPAs, so the scores of minority students should not hurt unless URMs account for at least ½ the class. On the other hand, increasing the scores of non-URMs would help.

Let’s face it, the law school facility at UH is not up to par. Every time a hurricane blows through town, the underground library floods and half the books are ruined. Then it takes ten years to reacquire the lost books. The school is located in a bad part of town and is associated with a fourth-tier university.

Maybe Rapoport can use her Rice University connections to induce Rice and its new president (former dean of CLS) into taking over UH Law School. [I know this is far-fetched, but the school is going nowhere under the current arrangement.]

Rice University could then provide a decent law facility on its campus (located in a desirable part of town), cut the size of the program, increase student selectivity and tuition, and in turn, increase the funding, prestige, and ranking of the law school.

Obviously, there is a stratification process going on among Texas law schools. The same thing happened in other large states a long time ago:

redacre, if you don't like Rapoport and you can't get into UT, why don't you try to transfer to SMU or Baylor?

Example:

5. The University of Texas at Austin School of Law Enrollment. It is the intent of the Legislature that The University of Texas at Austin study the impact that enrollment levels have on the quality of education at the University's Law School. The University shall make recommendations on the optimal enrollment level at which the school can provide the highest quality education. The University shall submit a report to the 80th Legislature, not later than January 1, 2007. It is the intent of the Legislature that a limitation on enrollment not adversely impact current funding levels.

Actually, I had an opportunity to attend UT, but decided on Houston b/c of the part-time program and other personal factors. I'm counting on my work experience to boost my employment prospects.

I'm not informed enough on the issues to be a proponent of either side, but I am surprised at the level of apparent support for the remove-the-dean movement, even among faculty. I suspect that there's more than rankings behind the effort to have the dean resign; I just don't know what it is.

Yeah, I do almost feel sorry for them. Students freak out when schools move down two spots and expect the deans to dom something about it. Just what can a dean do though? Every school is trying to move up in the rankings. A lot of it is out of their hands.

I have a friend who's an alum there, and my understanding is that the problem is that UH used to be right around the bottom of the first tier (around 50) and now has slipped into the second tier, either moving below or increasing the gap between UH and other Texas schools like Southern Methodist U or Baylor.

I assure you this was not solely based on the rankings. This has been brewing for some time. The faculty was divided on the direction of the lawschool and where it may have been more evenly divided in the past, the recent events were simply the straw the broke the camel's back.

No, I mean the direction of the law school. A certain group prefers to strive to be the best law school it can be and others honestly (and I know this is a bit shocking for xoxo) want the school to "service" the city and state. By this I mean that it should be a more accessible school and not just accept the most qualified students.

Apparently the dean was viewed more as the latter group and was not willing to take the steps necessary to be a competitive law school.

There were apparently other concerns involved as well. In any event, I think this is a positive move for the school, regardless of whether I support Rapoport or not (she is a great person by the way), in that the new dean will have the clear objective to head the school in the right direction (i.e., more competitive). It's really a shame that the rankings slippage was more of a conscious choice (or rather a lack of action to prevent it), than just market pressures. Apparently it's going to be a national search and I think the school should take a serious shot and getting some "name" candidate who would significantly affect the school's reputation. After all, look what Ken Starr did for Pepperdine. They're up 30 spots in just a few years.

I figured maybe there'd be maybe 1 or 2 Pepperdine summers max at each LA biglaw firm. I didn't really expect to see Pepperdine tied with Stanford and UCLA at Kirkland LA, even with Ken Starr. (We'll see when somebody posts the numbers, but I don't think the OMM-Loyola connection is nearly as strong.)

Is there not a California publication that reports this information? Texas, for example, has the Texas Lawyer which reports each school's representation in the large firms. I might add that UHLC consistently beats out SMU and Baylor each year (even adjusted for class size I believe).

Like I said, this isn't purely based on the rankings. There are other issues. However, the faculty was split on this issue and Rapoport had the perception, at least, of leaning towards the passive side of the faculty. Once the rankings slipped, obviously the balance in the faculty shifted.

In other words, whether the school should move up or down in the rankings.

Honestly, this is not the deans' fault. The Texas Legislature does not adequately fund its state schools and it is difficult for a school like UH to raise the type of private funds that a school like UT can raise. If UH wants to play the game, it may have to raise tuition (a lot).

Funding can also be a problem in the search for a new dean as it has been at UNC:

"UNC has been forced to reopen its search for a dean after it offered the job to Duke University law professor Erwin Chemerinsky, an academic star who said no.

Chemerinsky set off alarm bells, not mincing words in explaining his reason. 'I think it's a terrific school, but it's a very underfunded school,' he says. 'I think any candidate will be concerned over money.'"

Sure, if you want to phrase it that way, go ahead. If you read my posts however you'll see exactly what I mean. Funding is a problem. The budget has been tight over the past several years, but that has turned around significantly. UHLC, other than a single yearly fundraising event, hasn't even attempted the level of fundraising efforts used by other similar school. UHLC apparently has close to 10,000 active alumni in the area. It should clearly be the goal of the new administration to both pursue more spending from the government (while its currently available) and pursue more private spending.

One of the possible routes is to move the school away from a purely public school and move towards a partial private partial public funding system like other schools (UVA and Penn are examples of schools that have done this I believe).

Whatever the new plan involves, it is good that a new plan is being developed.

I thought it made the shift at one point in its history. I haven't exactly studied the history of the Penn law school. Not being from the area this isn't exactly common knowledge. Maybe I'm thinking of a different school (Michigan was mentioned above).

Either way, it is clear from my post that I do know that it is not a public school.

Then why in the hell did you even mention them as an example of a school that has shifted away from public funding? A private school does not shift away from public funding since it never had public funding. I think you are trying to back peddle here.

It was an example. If I was wrong, and apparently I am, then it was a bad example. To all who were confused I apologize. Please insert another school that has made the shift from public to private funding in Penn's stead.

I'm not sure what you're asking. Are you asking about the budget for UHLC? I really don't know the specifics. By the way, I suspect that the horrible faculty/student ratio is a significant reason behind the lower ranking of UHLC. It is at the very bottom of the top 100 in that respect. Movement towards the median of this measure would likely result in a couple points in the overal rating. Given then small difference between the schools in this area that could be a huge boost.

the real tragedy here is that a flawed ranking in a news magazine is able to strongly influence admissions and job placement at a professional school. is this really what the legal profession has come to? the medical profession pays much less attention to these rankings (some but not religious like devotion).

"the real tragedy here is that a flawed ranking in a news magazine is able to strongly influence admissions and job placement at a professional school."

i doubt that the rankings influence job placement much at all. do you think law firm partners sit around and comment about the rankings? their perceptions of school quality are based on where they and all their colleagues went to school and on the quality of associates they have hired from the school in the past.

February Bar Results are pretty worthless. Think about it. Who graduates mid-year? Either people who fucked up and needed extra time to complete a degree, OR people who couldn't get jobs 2L summer, so they took classes.